Forum:FA criteria
Now that we have a Manual of Style and a Good article scheme we should decide on criteria for featured articles.--LegOtaku (talk • ) 12:26, September 7, 2009 (UTC) * I know I can't think of anything else, and the page has been untouched for a week- maybe we should start the voting process? 02:46, September 16, 2009 (UTC) Add suggestions below. When enough suggestions are collected, we can start with the voting process. Sugestions for FA criteria Additional criteria 1''' Should have a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections '''2 Several relevant section headings and considerable content (continuous text) in the respective sections. 3''' Completeness: The article neglects no major facts or details and constitutes a detailed description/overview/presentation of the subject in question '''4 Neutrality 5''' Images: It should contain several relevant images, apart from the one in the infobox, that are placed within the text, in addition to pictures in a gallery. '''6 No improvement tags: Since the FA should comply with the MoS and be both complete and neutral, it shouldn't be tagged with improvement messages. Vote List the numbers of the suggestions you are supporting or opposing in the respective section, followed by your sig (~~~~) and - optionally - a comment. Supported suggestions * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 --LegOtaku (talk • ) 07:53, September 30, 2009 (UTC) * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 08:24, September 30, 2009 (UTC) * 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 -[[User:Nerfblasterpro|'Nerf']][[User talk:Nerfblasterpro|'blasterpro: ']] 00:22, October 4, 2009 (UTC) * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 21:40, October 22, 2009 (UTC) * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Though sort of had to under stand what that says.-- 11:26, October 25, 2009 (UTC) * 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 User:Bionicle4884 19:29, December 6, 2009 (UTC) Opposed suggestions Other comments * I agree with 5, however for older sets/minifigures especially it can be hard to find more than one image. Maybe it should state that this should happen provided that more than one image exists/is attainable, or some similar statement which conveys the same idea? 08:24, September 30, 2009 (UTC) ** Okay, we could add "If possible" to suggestion No.5. On the other hand, we should be aware of the fact that not every article can actually attain FA status. If there isn't much to write about, it can only become a GA. The same applies if there aren't any relevant images. --LegOtaku (talk • ) 09:27, September 30, 2009 (UTC) *** Fair enough- I see your point- leaving it as is would be better. Also, while FA's have been voted on, I haven't added it as an FA since this is currently being voted on 06:53, October 2, 2009 (UTC) * Btw, passing these criteria will also change the purpose of the Brickipedia:Featured article candidates page. Instead of deciding whether or not an article will be FA and on the mainpage, the voters will just decide which FA will be on mainpage. The decission whether or not an article will gain FA status will be made by a board of reviewers who will check if a nominated article meets the criteria. -- 17:10, October 8, 2009 (UTC) Category:Forum archive